2009
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.0800246
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DNA barcoding will frequently fail in complicated groups: An example in wild potatoes

Abstract: DNA barcoding ("barcoding") has been proposed as a rapid and practical molecular method to identify species via diagnostic variation in short orthologous DNA sequences from one or a few universal genomic regions. It seeks to address in a rapid and simple way the "taxonomic impediment" of a greater need for taxonomic identifications than can be supplied by taxonomists. Using a complicated plant group, Solanum sect. Petota (wild potatoes), I tested barcoding with the most variable and frequently suggested plant … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

4
148
1
8

Year Published

2009
2009
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 162 publications
(161 citation statements)
references
References 109 publications
(138 reference statements)
4
148
1
8
Order By: Relevance
“…DNA-based identification (barcoding) is simple, does not require taxonomic expertise, and is free from subjective errors, which is not the case in morphological identification. Valid identification of unknown samples is the main goal of barcoding (Hebert and Gregory, 2005), despite ongoing criticism of the feasibility or even necessity of DNA barcoding for general taxonomic purposes Spooner, 2009). Nowadays, it is widely accepted that any valid plant barcode should be multi-locus, preferably comprising a conserved coding region such as rbcL and a more rapidly evolving region that is most likely non-coding (Kress et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…DNA-based identification (barcoding) is simple, does not require taxonomic expertise, and is free from subjective errors, which is not the case in morphological identification. Valid identification of unknown samples is the main goal of barcoding (Hebert and Gregory, 2005), despite ongoing criticism of the feasibility or even necessity of DNA barcoding for general taxonomic purposes Spooner, 2009). Nowadays, it is widely accepted that any valid plant barcode should be multi-locus, preferably comprising a conserved coding region such as rbcL and a more rapidly evolving region that is most likely non-coding (Kress et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some cases of complex recently evolved species groups DNA barcoding may simply be inappropriate as an identification tool (2). This difficulty is especially acute in cases where certain life history traits have affected the rates of molecular evolution in a lineage, which in turn may affect rates of species assignment by DNA barcodes [e.g., generation times (3) and age-of-crown group diversification (4)].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, species delimitation based on mitochondrial genes only may not reflect species boundaries as accurately as an integrative approach exploring a combination of various data sources (Will et al 2005;Spooner 2009;Dupuis et al 2012;Carstens et al 2013). Essentially, a multilocus strategy provides independent estimates of both mitochondrial and nuclear genealogical histories, and congruence among estimates provides strong evidence of actual species divergence.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%